W56HZV-17-T-L529_Solicitation_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

1. Page 3 of the solicitation, Item No 0001, states that the Contracts shall “Conduct an on-site surveillance Type-II audit, in accordance with Section 5 of the ISO/IEC 17025 standard, of eight (8)

TARDEC laboratories that have been previously accredited and reaffirm accreditation. See PWS 5.1.1”

ISO/IEC 17011, the standard that all ILAC MRA signatory accreditation bodies must comply with, states in section 7.11.3 that “accreditation bodies shall rely on either reassessment alone or a combination of reassessment and surveillance” and reassessment is required to include a review of all relevant documents and records and witnessing and collection of objective evidence that the laboratory is competent and conforms with all relevant standards and requirements for accreditation. Limiting the

“on-site surveillance Type-II audits’ of the eight currently accredited TARDEC laboratories would prevent the contracted accreditation body from complying with ISO/IEC 17011 requirements. Will the Army

Contracting Command amend the Solicitation, W56HZV-17-T-L529, to require an ISO/IEC 17011 compliance reassessment of the eight (8) TARDEC Laboratories currently accredited to ensure continued

ISO/IEC 17011 and ILAC recognition of those accreditations?

A: The customer has authorized an amendment to the language of CLIN 0001 to require an ISO/IEC

17011 compliance assessment during the “on-site surveillance Type-II audits.” Furthermore, all option

CLINs based on CLIN 0001 (1001, 2001, 3001, and 4001) will be amended accordingly.

2. In regards to ITEM NO 0002, page 3, the second paragraph states that “All travel requires Government approval/authorizations and notification to the COR.” If the contracted accreditation body has an established travel policy and makes use of an online travel management system, is pre approval for all travel required? If yes, to what extent must travel expenses be pre-approved?

A: Due to Government regulations related to the documentation of contractor travel, all travel required under the contract must be pre-approved by the COR. The travel expenses that require COR approval are transportation, lodging, and per diem rates.

3. In regards to ITEM NO 0002, page 3, the second paragraph states that “All travel requires Government approval/authorizations and notification to the COR.” If approval for all travel is required, what turn-around time on requests can be expected?

A: Expected turnaround on travel approval is 3 business days.

4. Are the “Contract Data Requirement List” tables found on pages 16-26 required to be completed as part of this solicitation?

A: No, the Contract Data Requirement List tables on pages 16-26 are not required to be completed as part of the solicitation. They have been included as examples of the CDRLs that will be expected of the contractor once work begins.

5. On pages 22 & 25, while the “Contract Data Requirement List” states that the Scope and Certification of Accreditation shall be provided within 30 days of completing the on-site assessment, sections 7.2.3 and 7.2.4 on page 38 both state that the Scope and Certificate of Accreditation shall be provided no later than 60 days after approval of corrective actions. Please note that the Scope and Certificate of

Accreditation shall be provided once corrective actions have been approved and accreditation has been approved by the Accreditation Council. This process generally completes within 30 days of corrective action being approved by Accreditation Services and the technical assessors as well as receipt of final payment. The entire accreditation process takes approximately 4 to 6 months to complete. Please consider revising the Contract Data Requirement List to state that the Scope and Certificate of

Accreditation will be provided no later than 60 days after corrective actions are approved and final payment is received.

A: PWS 7.2.3 Scope of Accreditation and 7.2.4 Certificate of Accreditation already specify that they will be provided “no later than 60 days after approval of corrective actions” (emphasis added).

6. Item 1.6.2, on page 28, references a “Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)” that is meant to be attached as attachment 2. Can you please provide a copy of the QASP?

A: The requirement for a QASP does not apply to this action based on the dollar threshold of the buy and the relevant Item 1.6.2 will be amended to “RESERVED.”

7. Item 1.6.4, on page 28, states that “the contractor is responsible for conducting business, between the core hours of 0900 and 1430 Monday thru Friday.” A normal on-site assessment makes use of an

Eight-hour work day. Will this be permitted during the on-site assessment of each TARDEC laboratory?

Must the assessment be limited to 5.5 hours on-site per day?

A: The listed core hours are not a limitation on the daily hours of the contractor. The core hours must be incorporated into the schedule of the contractor such that the contractor is available during said hours and the contractor can construct their own hours in any such way that the listed core hours are included and the totality of the contractor’s proposed hours are continuous including a period for lunch.

8. ITEM NO 0003 on page 3 (for example) and section 1.6.6 on page 29 do not appear to be in agreement; while ITEM NO 0003 states that actual expenses will be reimbursed, section 1.6.6 states that the award will be a Firm Fixed Price contract. Please clarify.

A: When pricing CLIN 0003 and its options (1003, 2003, 3003, and 4003), the contractor is expected to provide an estimated travel cost ceiling for the travel taken during that period. Actual costs of travel will be reimbursed according to the rates and regulations as established under the terms of the contract up to the estimated ceiling. Any costs related to travel beyond said ceiling will be at the expense of the contractor.

9. Part 5, Specific Tasks, found on page 36 appears to suggest that the initial assessment of each new location will be performed in the same year as the surveillance assessor of that same location. Example, in the base year, 8 locations undergo surveillance assessment to maintain current accreditation. In

Option Year 1 a new laboratory will undergo full on-site assessment. However, section 5.1.3 states that

9 locations undergo surveillance assessment. If one new laboratory has recently undergone initial assessment, the surveillance assessment of this location would occur in Option year 2. Can you please provide clarification on how many locations are to undergo surveillance assessment in Option Years 1, 2, 3, and 4 (see sections 5.1.3, 5.1.5, 5.1.7, 5.1.9)?

A: The number of locations to be assessed in each option year is correct as written. One lab will have just received its certification at the beginning of the contract (initial certification not included in this contract) and as such is not included in the initial eight that will be receiving their surveillance audits in the first year, but must be accounted for in each of the following years. This amounts to nine receiving a surveillance audit in the first option year in addition to a tenth lab receiving its accreditation.

10. Section 1.6.21.2, on page 31 refers to “Timely submission of all deliverables…” Please clarify

“timely”. The Contractor has established turn-around times for submission of deliverables. Upon the exit meeting for the on-site assessment, the assessor leaves an organization with a report of the assessment along with a draft scope of accreditation and a deficiency report if any non-conformances are identified.

The assessor report is reviewed in full by Accreditation Services and the organization receives an acknowledgement of receipt and review of the full report within 2 weeks’ time. Does the above described process be acceptable?

A: Timeliness is determined based on the deliverable in question. So long as the particular deliverable is received within the periods specified in PWS 7.2, it is considered timely.

11. Page 45, section 52.204-4022 REQUIREMENT FOR AN OPSEC STANDING OPERATION

PROCEDURE/PLAN (JAN 2014), letter a states: “The contractor is subject to provisions of the TACOM

LCMC OPSEC Standing Operating Procedures (SOP/Plan), per AR 530-1, Operations Security. This

SOP/Plan specifies the government’s critical information, why it needs to be protected, where it is located, who is responsible for it, and how to protect it.” Letter c states, “The contractor shall identify an individual who will be an OPSEC Coordinator. The contractor will ensure that this individual is OPSEC

Level I.” Please clarify whether or not this is required of the Contractor. If so, please provide a copy of the SOP/Plan (AR 530-1, Operations Security).

A: The contractor will be required to act in accordance with clause 52.204-4022. Per paragraph (b) “the contractor will receive a copy of the SOP/Plan at time of award.”

12. Page 45, section 52.204-4600 TRUSTED ASSOCIATE SPONSORSHIP SYSTEM (TASS) PROGRAM (Oct

2013) states “The contractor is responsible for processing applications for Common Access Cards (CAC) for every contractor employee who deploys with the military force, OR who has need to access any government computer network in accordance with FAR 52.204-9, “Personal Identity Verification of

Contractor Personnel.” Assessors and staff will not be directly accessing any government computer network. Please clarify whether or not the assessor or staff will be required to obtain and maintain a

CAC.

A: Clause 52.204-4600 is a mandatory clause that is included in all ACC-WRN contracts. The assessors and staff will not be required to obtain and maintain a CAC for this contract.

13. Page 43 states that the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) System is to be used for the submission process. Is this the only form of submission for this RFP? Please clarify.

A: Submission to FBO or directly to me by e-mail are the only forms of submission acceptable for this

RFP.

14. What Scopes of Accreditation will the new laboratories have?

A: The customer has indicated that the Scopes of Accreditation the new laboratories will have will be determined for each lab separately in accordance with its needs.

15. Based on the information provided and statement that all labs operate under the same management system (per Part I section 1.2-LQMS), we would be able to provide fewer scopes, to save money, with the confirmation that key activities (i.e. policy formulation, process and/or procedure development and, as appropriate, contract review, planning conformity assessments, review, approval and decision on the results of conformity assessments) are only happening at one location, which would then become the main location. Is a separate Scope of Accreditation for each location required or can a single Scope be used to capture all locations? Please confirm that fewer scopes are acceptable and that key functions occur centrally.

A: The quality system is a common system for all labs. However, the customer would prefer to maintain separate scopes for each laboratory.